How can this get so positive reviews?

[Jordan_Peterson]

I did a playtest at one of my friends, he owns the game not me.
First of all, he went back to menu once by accidently pressing escape when checking something in the menu.
When he wanted to go back to his game, he had to start over from the beginning.
Nothing was safed so to speak. Really annoying
Then it seems there is no button or function to skip things. You have to watch the whole intro and can not skip anything.
Also why is the whole game capped at 30 fps ?

[Morbsexual]

Originally posted by Jordan Peterson:

I did a playtest at one of my friends, he owns the game not me.
First of all, he went back to menu once by accidently pressing escape when checking something in the menu.
When he wanted to go back to his game, he had to start over from the beginning.
Nothing was safed so to speak. Really annoying
Then it seems there is no button or function to skip things. You have to watch the whole intro and can not skip anything.
Also why is the whole game capped at 30 fps ?

It's a ♥♥♥♥ port, which is annoying I agree. But the game itself is quite good (in my opinion)

If you get this mod your experience will be improved alot ( it unlocks the framerate and fixes widescreen support)

https://github.com/Lyall/StarTrekResurgenceFix/releases/tag/v1.0.5

[coyotecyb]

The story and acting are great, but CBS HAS the resources and technology to make the graphics and interface SO much better. There is no excuse, with the technology we have, that we get a game with mid 2000's Graphics in 2024.

[Rastlaff]

Positive reviews are most probably done using the viral advertisement. It's obvious from this topic that people replying are devs (or their friends and relatives) trying to obfuscate the troubles using nasty methods to devalue valid argumentation and criticism.

[[Kartell]Captain Data]

Originally posted by coyotecyb:

The story and acting are great, but CBS HAS the resources and technology to make the graphics and interface SO much better. There is no excuse, with the technology we have, that we get a game with mid 2000's Graphics in 2024.

Actually, story & gameplay beat graphics.

I've got a ton of older games still running on my rig just because they offer so much more gameplay and story than some of the stuff big publishers sell these days. I mean, I still enjoy Mass Effect, for instance, and my current main time sink is X4 Foundation (all DLC included). Both aren't great on graphics, but I have hundreds and hundreds of hours put in both. In case of X4, it's nearing 1000 hours.

ST:R has sub-par graphics, I must admit. Looks like games from before 2010. I doubt the devs used mocap technology - that's all "hand crafted", including facial animations and it shows. No one would do it like that anymore. Also the lightning in the scenes leaves much to be desired. It may even the reason why the graphics look so dated.

Gameplay is a mixed bag. At least for keyboard + mouse it feels sluggish and especially the QTE section feels difficult to control at times. I'm not sure why the devs decided for a third person perspective, as the camera is placed so close to the character's shoulder, a first person approach would have produced better results here.

Story and immersion however are selling points here. I feel as if I were watching a good ol' TNG episde, warts and all. The "dated look" actually helps to improve that immersion. However, while the story works and the immersion great, there's a massive lack of freedom: more often than not I feel as I was put on a railroad. There are far too few opportunities to explore the world around you and you're strictly confined to whatever sparse room there is for any given situation. I consider this a huge step back, especially compared to games like Mass Effect - which allowed you to explore the Normandy between missions.

IMHO:

As a gamer, I'd give it a 5/10 points. Feels dated and controls are simply not refined enough. There are tons of QTE which simply feel out of place and difficult to control at times.

As a Star Trek fan, I'd like to give it a 8/10 points for story and immersion, despite (or because of?) dated graphics.

[Narxes081206]

Originally posted by Jordan Peterson:

I did a playtest at one of my friends, he owns the game not me.
First of all, he went back to menu once by accidently pressing escape when checking something in the menu.
When he wanted to go back to his game, he had to start over from the beginning.
Nothing was safed so to speak. Really annoying
Then it seems there is no button or function to skip things. You have to watch the whole intro and can not skip anything.
Also why is the whole game capped at 30 fps ?

Yup, just noticed this in the demo. It only updates the save when a new scene/scenario happens, and you have to start from the beginning of that scene. How did this pass QA? Is there a mod that would fix this? Otherwise, the demo seems pretty good.

[RPG Gamer Man]

Originally posted by KartellCaptain Data:

Originally posted by coyotecyb:

The story and acting are great, but CBS HAS the resources and technology to make the graphics and interface SO much better. There is no excuse, with the technology we have, that we get a game with mid 2000's Graphics in 2024.

Actually, story & gameplay beat graphics.

I've got a ton of older games still running on my rig just because they offer so much more gameplay and story than some of the stuff big publishers sell these days. I mean, I still enjoy Mass Effect, for instance, and my current main time sink is X4 Foundation (all DLC included). Both aren't great on graphics, but I have hundreds and hundreds of hours put in both. In case of X4, it's nearing 1000 hours.

ST:R has sub-par graphics, I must admit. Looks like games from before 2010. I doubt the devs used mocap technology - that's all "hand crafted", including facial animations and it shows. No one would do it like that anymore. Also the lightning in the scenes leaves much to be desired. It may even the reason why the graphics look so dated.

Gameplay is a mixed bag. At least for keyboard + mouse it feels sluggish and especially the QTE section feels difficult to control at times. I'm not sure why the devs decided for a third person perspective, as the camera is placed so close to the character's shoulder, a first person approach would have produced better results here.

Story and immersion however are selling points here. I feel as if I were watching a good ol' TNG episde, warts and all. The "dated look" actually helps to improve that immersion. However, while the story works and the immersion great, there's a massive lack of freedom: more often than not I feel as I was put on a railroad. There are far too few opportunities to explore the world around you and you're strictly confined to whatever sparse room there is for any given situation. I consider this a huge step back, especially compared to games like Mass Effect - which allowed you to explore the Normandy between missions.

IMHO:

As a gamer, I'd give it a 5/10 points. Feels dated and controls are simply not refined enough. There are tons of QTE which simply feel out of place and difficult to control at times.

As a Star Trek fan, I'd like to give it a 8/10 points for story and immersion, despite (or because of?) dated graphics.

I still love my star trek 25 anniversary game. I do not really care the graphics look like NES era ones. I guess some people are picky about graphic quality, others are not. Here you go, compare it to these graphics..lol:

https://store.steampowered.com/app/359650/Star_Trek__25th_Anniversary/

[SteinDrSolido]

Originally posted by RPG Gamer Man:

Originally posted by KartellCaptain Data:

Actually, story & gameplay beat graphics.

I've got a ton of older games still running on my rig just because they offer so much more gameplay and story than some of the stuff big publishers sell these days. I mean, I still enjoy Mass Effect, for instance, and my current main time sink is X4 Foundation (all DLC included). Both aren't great on graphics, but I have hundreds and hundreds of hours put in both. In case of X4, it's nearing 1000 hours.

ST:R has sub-par graphics, I must admit. Looks like games from before 2010. I doubt the devs used mocap technology - that's all "hand crafted", including facial animations and it shows. No one would do it like that anymore. Also the lightning in the scenes leaves much to be desired. It may even the reason why the graphics look so dated.

Gameplay is a mixed bag. At least for keyboard + mouse it feels sluggish and especially the QTE section feels difficult to control at times. I'm not sure why the devs decided for a third person perspective, as the camera is placed so close to the character's shoulder, a first person approach would have produced better results here.

Story and immersion however are selling points here. I feel as if I were watching a good ol' TNG episde, warts and all. The "dated look" actually helps to improve that immersion. However, while the story works and the immersion great, there's a massive lack of freedom: more often than not I feel as I was put on a railroad. There are far too few opportunities to explore the world around you and you're strictly confined to whatever sparse room there is for any given situation. I consider this a huge step back, especially compared to games like Mass Effect - which allowed you to explore the Normandy between missions.

IMHO:

As a gamer, I'd give it a 5/10 points. Feels dated and controls are simply not refined enough. There are tons of QTE which simply feel out of place and difficult to control at times.

As a Star Trek fan, I'd like to give it a 8/10 points for story and immersion, despite (or because of?) dated graphics.

I still love my star trek 25 anniversary game. I do not really care the graphics look like NES era ones. I guess some people are picky about graphic quality, others are not. Here you go, compare it to these graphics..lol:

https://store.steampowered.com/app/359650/Star_Trek__25th_Anniversary/

[VoidEngineer]

Originally posted by Rastlaff:

Positive reviews are most probably done using the viral advertisement. It's obvious from this topic that people replying are devs (or their friends and relatives) trying to obfuscate the troubles using nasty methods to devalue valid argumentation and criticism.

You are coming off a bit deranged and paranoid. There is not some secret cabal of simps operating a shadow marketing campaign for this game. Do you hear yourself?

[wirednight]

Originally posted by VoidEngineer:

Originally posted by Rastlaff:

Positive reviews are most probably done using the viral advertisement. It's obvious from this topic that people replying are devs (or their friends and relatives) trying to obfuscate the troubles using nasty methods to devalue valid argumentation and criticism.

You are coming off a bit deranged and paranoid. There is not some secret cabal of simps operating a shadow marketing campaign for this game. Do you hear yourself?

Welcome to Steam, where every idiot thinks that if you don't agree with them it's a global conspiracy, and if you do agree with them, they'll still attack you for clown points.

[Burntout]

Originally posted by wirednight:

Originally posted by VoidEngineer:

You are coming off a bit deranged and paranoid. There is not some secret cabal of simps operating a shadow marketing campaign for this game. Do you hear yourself?

Welcome to Steam, where every idiot thinks that if you don't agree with them it's a global conspiracy, and if you do agree with them, they'll still attack you for clown points.

I was just thinking this myself.

Anyways, I left a positive review and somehow I hope I still retained my humanity. ;)
It's been awhile since I had this much fun in a game. The story is great!!!

Maybe a bit bias because I grew up on Star Trek and I'm a huge fan.

[Crunchy[Daz]]

Originally posted by Rastlaff:

Positive reviews are most probably done using the viral advertisement. It's obvious from this topic that people replying are devs (or their friends and relatives) trying to obfuscate the troubles using nasty methods to devalue valid argumentation and criticism.

If its so obvious then post all the proof you have showing how obvious it is. Whats that? You aren't going to do that? Because you're talking out your ass and making ♥♥♥♥ up? Got it.

[Darq]

Yeah you playtested with one of your "friends", pirate friends.
It's a good game.
Did you play The Longest Journey?
It's an interactive movie with a good story.
It could've been Mass Effect, if it had RPGlike character development, but it doesn't and it's not even missing.
Which games were the best? Those with a good story. This game has it.

[Wompoo]

I enjoyed it myself, and would buy a squeal, no hesitation (just please fix the animations).

[Jordan_Peterson]

Originally posted by Darq:

Yeah you playtested with one of your "friends", pirate friends.
It's a good game.
Did you play The Longest Journey?
It's an interactive movie with a good story.
It could've been Mass Effect, if it had RPGlike character development, but it doesn't and it's not even missing.
Which games were the best? Those with a good story. This game has it.

Dont project from you onto others mate.
If the story is good but the gameplay is not, what prevents me to watch it on youtube and skip the awful interaction with the game itself?
And you can already watch the whole game there, or on Twitch. So please give me a break.